Starbucks CEO: On second thought, ObamaCare doesn’t look so good

posted at 1:36 pm on March 22, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

When Congress passed ObamaCare, Democrats countered Republican criticisms that it would damage small businesses and the economy by pointing out the support of people like Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks.  Schultz threw his weight behind ObamaCare because health-insurance costs at Starbucks had exceeded their costs of coffee itself, and Schultz liked the idea of government intervening to prevent “literally a fracturing of humanity for almost 50 million Americans not to have health insurance.”  But now that ObamaCare has begun its roll-out, Schultz no longer likes what he sees (via Politico):

Q: Starbucks was vocal about [wanting] health-care reform. How do you feel about how it worked out?

A: We have been a leader for almost 20 years now in demonstrating our heartfelt commitment to making sure that we provide health coverage for the majority of our people.

That cost last year was $250 million. We have faced double-digit increases for almost five consecutive years with no end in sight.

So, when I was invited to the White House prior to health care being reformed, I was very supportive of the president’s plan, primarily because I felt it was literally a fracturing of humanity for almost 50 million Americans not to have health insurance.

There’s no plan that would be a perfect plan, but the intent of the bill and the heartfelt commitment to insure the uninsured is the right approach. I think as the bill is currently written and if it was going to land in 2014 under the current guidelines, the pressure on small businesses, because of the mandate, is too great.

Hopefully Schultz isn’t as fast and loose with his corporate numbers as he is with the statistics for the uninsured, or else he’s going to have a heck of a time with Sarbanes-Oxley.  Of the “almost 50 million Americans,” really 46.5 million from the 2009 Census analysis, more than a quarter of them were foreign-born residents (12.3 million), with only 2.8 million of those naturalized citizens.  More than a third, 17.8 million, had household incomes at or above the national average of $50,000 and could afford to buy insurance on their own.  Throw in the Medicaid/CHIP underreporting, and the number comes closer to 17 million uninsured without choice.

The “fracturing of humanity” nonsense aside (was humanity fractured before employer-based insurance came along, and did it magically heal at that time?), the massive costs of ObamaCare could have been avoided and insurance provided to those 17 million at a fraction of the price, without the kind of interventions that Schultz now belatedly decries.  Instead, thanks to Schultz and other big-business CEOs looking to offload health-insurance costs onto taxpayers, the mandates and the leviathan bureaucracies to come will suck the life out of the economy, especially for small businesses.  All of this was entirely predictable before Schultz decided to throw in for statist intervention.

But let’s not stop with Schultz in this interview.  Having just heard a repudiation of ObamaCare from one of its more prominent private-sector champions, did Seattle Times reporter Melissa Allison follow up with any tough questions about what Schultz would do to push back against ObamaCare — or even ask another clarifying question?  Er … not exactly:

Q: Over the years, you’ve tried to attract more people into your stores in the afternoons. How is that going?

I think we’ve found a real-life replacement for “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?”

Heritage does the follow-up that the Seattle Times avoids.  Why will ObamaCare hurt small businesses?  An Indiana franchisee of IHOP explains that the costs will outstrip profits per employee, which means layoffs, cutting benefits, and an end to expansion plans:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Somebody made him an offer he couldn’t refuse.

portlandon on March 22, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Seattle Times reporter Melissa Allison

I am visualizing the ST comment section now:

“Dis is why we needz teh SINGUL PAYERZ!!!1!”

fiatboomer on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Makes wonder how such a dimwit could ever start and grow a such a successful business.

TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

I think we’ve found a real-life replacement for “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?”

I’m not sure where this recent incarnation of Ed came from, but I like that killer instinct going straight for the jugular.

ButterflyDragon on March 22, 2011 at 1:42 PM

the mandates and the leviathan bureaucracies to come will such the life out of the economy

Count to 10 on March 22, 2011 at 1:42 PM

above the national average of $50,000 and could afford to buy insurance on their own

I would really like to know where this number comes from as the magic number for being able to afford insurance. Someone buying health insurance for 2 to 4 people could easily spend $1500 a month or more. That’s the problem. Many middle income people cannot afford health insurance. That’s no excuse for Obamacare, but making $50,000 a year does not necessarily mean one can afford health insurance.

bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Ed I hope you realize Crr6 six is going swing by between Contracts and Torts to refute all of your above points.

Kataklysmic on March 22, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Liberal elitists learning the hard way…oh that Utopian idealism!

Schadenfreude on March 22, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Maybe Shultz should check out how fellow lefty business “Whole Foods” does healthcare for its employees. It’s well documented by John Stossel’s “Sick in America” here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlNtWy8TX_Y

parteagirl on March 22, 2011 at 1:45 PM

“So, when I was invited to the White House prior to health care being reformed, I was very supportive of the president’s plan,…”

Because they were giving away free white lab coats that day…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 22, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Did Starbucks get a waiver yet from HHS?

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 1:47 PM

duh, just get a waiver.

tommer74 on March 22, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Hey Starbucks CEO in case you haven’t figured it out yet.

To the Marxists your wealth is what you have STOLEN.

Whine while you still can.

PappyD61 on March 22, 2011 at 1:47 PM

What, he didn’t get his waiver yet?

Ward Cleaver on March 22, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Did Starbucks get a waiver yet from HHS?

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 1:47 PM

I bet they asked for one, and were turned down, thus the sour grapes now on display.

Rebar on March 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM

bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Are you familiar with meaning of “national average?” While it is hard to draw an arbitrary line at where one can “afford” anything, any successful business (insurance, auto manufacturers, etc.) would have to have a business plan so that the “average” consumer could purchase a viable plan to succeed, IMO.

And with your own numbers, $1500/month, the family you mention would spend $18,000/yr. with $32,000 left for housing, food etc. They would probably also have a low tax expense (or even get a refund).

Easy? No. Possible? I think so.

cs89 on March 22, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Harbucks, “It’s one thing to pretend we are a bunch of hip, progressives when we are trying to sell overpriced coffee to moonbats, but when it starts to hurt the bottom line, all bets are off.”

It’s too bad we never had a chance at real health care reform.

Every employer across the country should get out of the health care game completely. No more employer plans, let employee compensation reflect those changes (and they will, that’s how competition works).

Let me pay cash for doctor visits via a health savings account and purchase my own catastrophic insurance.

Watch health care costs plummet.

reaganaut on March 22, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Why?

Were you left out of the waiver list?

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Makes wonder how such a dimwit could ever start and grow a such a successful business.

TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Look at their customer type.

Lesson of the day, there is always somebody else (more) easily duped.

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

So, when I was invited to the White House prior to health care being reformed, I was very supportive of the president’s plan

Errr… The president never had a plan. Perhaps someone needs a little caffeine?

stvnscott on March 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Makes wonder how such a dimwit could ever start and grow a such a successful business.

TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Shultz knows how to destroy a NBA basketball franchise. He bought the Sonics, drove them into the ground, and then sold them to buyers from Oklahoma City instead of a local Seattle group. The guy is a putz. He must have some brilliant people around him to get where he is today.

Mallard T. Drake on March 22, 2011 at 2:03 PM

People screamed NO NO NO!!! Tea partiers in droves, said NO, and protested against it.

Polls told Dems…NO!!!

Why? Because we saw what was coming. Funny how someone can run a multi million dollar business such as Starbucks, but is to stupid to have seen how it was really going to work?

I’d fire this imbecile in a hurry, if I were on the board.

capejasmine on March 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

I bet they asked for one, and were turned down, thus the sour grapes now on display.

Rebar on March 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM

I can’t see Obama alienating the owner of Starbucks BEFORE the 2012 election. That’s the whole point of the waivers. To delay the inevitable pain til after the election. Once the fit hits the shan in 2014, Obama figures he can’t be held accountable for it anyway. Plus he naively thinks the public will be clamoring for single payer when in reality the Dems will lose even more seats.

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

We used to pay for our doctor visits before companies began offering insurance plans. Why don’t you cut back on your employee benefits and let them pay for some of their own expenses. That way you could lower the price of some coffee drinks and get more business. It’s not cruel, I promise.

Kissmygrits on March 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Caffeine is addictive–that helped build Starbucks. Actually I love their espresso. Better than all the others.

Pastry – inedible.
Obamacare support – idiotic.

Call the CEO of Whole Foods for tips, Howard.

PattyJ on March 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Shultz knows how to destroy a NBA basketball franchise. He bought the Sonics, drove them into the ground, and then sold them to buyers from Oklahoma City instead of a local Seattle group. The guy is a putz. He must have some brilliant people around him to get where he is today.

Mallard T. Drake on March 22, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Well I don’t completely blame Schultz for that. Yes, Clay Bennett(I think that’s the dude’s name) was from Oklahoma and telegraphed from day one that he wanted to move the Sonics. But if the city of Seattle had called his bluff and built a new arena, I doubt David Stern would’ve just let that franchise skip town.

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Makes wonder how such a dimwit could ever start and grow a such a successful business.

TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

By selling his overpriced, overrated brewed swill to west coast left-wing pseudo-intellectuals with deep pockets who have all the time in the world to sit around coffee shops and sip coffee all day.

UltimateBob on March 22, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Did Starbucks get a waiver yet from HHS?

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 1:47 PM

I bet they asked for one, and were turned down, thus the sour grapes now on display.

Rebar on March 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Yeah, if he did get one, he would be praising Obamacare again.

Starblechs!

Sterling Holobyte on March 22, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Someone buying health insurance for 2 to 4 people could easily spend $1500 a month or more. That’s the problem. Many middle income people cannot afford health insurance. That’s no excuse for Obamacare, but making $50,000 a year does not necessarily mean one can afford health insurance.

bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

One could easily spend that amount on a bumper-to-bumper, $5 co-pay kind of cadillac policy. A high-deductable major medical policy and an HSA account would cost considerably less, and has the benefit of introducing some motivation to shop for the best deal in madical care. Lack of competition in medical care has been a big factor in rise of costs, unlike things like cosmetic surgury and lasik eye corrections, which are generally not covered by insurance, and have gone down in price.

iurockhead on March 22, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

A liberal on a caffeine buzz is the most dangerous kind.

Kini on March 22, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Whenever we start hearing about spiraling health costs, it helps to remember one little thing. If we’re getting more health care than we can afford, we’re doing it because there is widespread belief that somebody else will pay for it. Maybe government — until it’s discovered that the government has to extract it from taxpayers. Maybe insurance companies — until it’s discovered that they’ll turn right around and hike premiums. Maybe generations yet unborn — until the world sees that we’ve pledged more would-be citizens into debt-slavery than we’re ever likely to have….and stops buying the bonds. Maybe the Chinese — I’m sure they’re quite amused about the prospect.

If medical services were provided transparently — with a schedule of fees posted on the wall — and paid in cash, then, by definition, we’d be getting only the healthcare we could afford. Everything beyond that is just chasing the will-o’-wisp.

cthulhu on March 22, 2011 at 2:12 PM

no plan that would be a perfect plan, but the intent of the bill and the heartfelt commitment to insure the uninsured is the right approach

Hey, ObamaCare’s intentions were good, so I supported the bill.

WashJeff on March 22, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Perhaps this clown should’ve had a little of his own product before jumping on that bandwagon while intoxicated with Hope&Change.
And maybe someone should ask him if he thinks the government can sell better coffee to more people at a better price than he can? And follow up with,“Then explain why you think the government can good health care to everybody at an affordable price?

cartooner on March 22, 2011 at 2:13 PM

There’s no plan that would be a perfect plan, but the intent of the bill and the heartfelt commitment to insure the uninsured is the right approach.

So… as a multi-million dollar business owner your cool with “Good Intentions” … and just muddling through the details ..eh?

Koa on March 22, 2011 at 2:13 PM

That cost last year was $250 million. We have faced double-digit increases for almost five consecutive years with no end in sight.

Because of the way government currently is regulating the industry.

He supported doubling down on stupid.

mankai on March 22, 2011 at 2:15 PM

He finally read the plan.

mankai on March 22, 2011 at 2:16 PM

I read Shultz’s book “Pour Your Heart Into It,” and while it definitely paints the picture of someone who fancies himself as “above the fray” of bottom-line realities, it also reveals someone who is not, in fact, “above the fray” of bottom-line realities. He didn’t grow Starbucks into what it is by ignoring those realities.

greggriffith on March 22, 2011 at 2:16 PM

The scary thing is that he is paid well for making financial decisions. The stockholders are being robbed.

obladioblada on March 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Am a Maxwell House fan myself

Done That on March 22, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Meh. Just apply for a waiver. Over a thousand companies and at least one state (Maine) all got their waivers. The Obama administration seems to be giving waivers away like candy.

Aitch748 on March 22, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Their small coffee is called tall.

Grande means large, the name of the second smallest of four sizes.

Venti means twenty. That’s the name of the sixteen ounce drink.

Trenta means thirty, the name of their thirty-one ounce drink.

When forced into a Starbucks with a client or my boss I never use their stupid names. I always ask for a small so the moronic “barristisimo” or whatever he’s supposed to be called can correct me by saying, “Tall?” To which I reply, “No small.”

Plus, they over-roast their beans.

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Why?

Were you left out of the waiver list?

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 1:55 PM

With their current insurance offering, Starbucks wouldn’t need to be on the waiver list.

Years ago my husband worked at Starbucks. His insurance at Starbucks was the exact same coverage that his parents had previously been paying $300/month for. His contribution was $16 each paycheck for a total of $32 each month. To qualify for these benefits, he had to work an average of 20 hours each week. To add a non-employee spouse to the plan was an additional $76 per month. That covered medical, dental and vision.

As the wife of an employee it was a great deal. As a shareholder in the company, I thought it was a pretty boneheaded move. They could easily have offered a less generous health plan – it still would have been very generous to the employees without costing the company so much money.

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:24 PM

That’s no excuse for Obamacare, but making $50,000 a year does not necessarily mean one can afford health insurance.
 
bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

 
If they downgraded their cable/internet/phone plans, drove used cars, ate out less, and stuck to a budget they could.

rogerb on March 22, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Am a Maxwell House fan myself
Done That on March 22, 2011 at 2:21 PM

E gads! Worse than Folgers.

When I can’t get Eight O’Clock Coffee I’ll settle for Chock Full o’ Nuts, believe it or not.

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:26 PM

If anyone told me that people would actually purchase a $6.00 dollar cup of coffee….

Kini on March 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Mr. President, if you’ve lost Starbucks you’ve lost America.

So sorry!!!

Really Right on March 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Chock full of Nuts

Kini on March 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

, but making $50,000 a year does not necessarily mean one can afford health insurance.

bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

No, it means you can’t afford two brand new cars, a bass boat, Uverse TV with a 100 inch LED screen, designer jeans, etc….

By the way, you can get cheaper insurance than that and if they would let us buy accross state lines, we’d get it a lot cheaper.

Vince on March 22, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM

To be fair, they originally had a short (10oz) and a tall (12oz).

The customers being the coffee addicts that they are asked for a bigger size so the grande was introduced (16oz).

So, at that point, they had a short, tall and grande.

16oz still wasn’t enough so they introduced the vente which actually is 20oz (24oz if you get an iced drink).

No one was ordering the short any longer so they removed it from the menu (though I believe they still have the cups in the store and you can still order a short size if you desire).

That’s how they ended up with the smallest size on the menu being a tall.

I’ve never understood why they didn’t just rename the sizes, but, it’s become such a part of the store that they probably just keep it that way for branding (whether people love it or hate it, it get’s mentioned more than almost anything else about Starbucks).

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

So, when I was invited to the White House prior to health care being reformed, I was very supportive of the president’s plan, primarily because I felt it was literally a fracturing of humanity for almost 50 million Americans not to have health insurance.

Yeh you looked silly in that white doctors jacket. I think it was meant for someone else./

CWforFreedom on March 22, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Then put the blasted FULL FAT COFFEE CAKE back on the menu, dangit!

rgranger on March 22, 2011 at 2:30 PM

Well I don’t completely blame Schultz for that. Yes, Clay Bennett(I think that’s the dude’s name) was from Oklahoma and telegraphed from day one that he wanted to move the Sonics. But if the city of Seattle had called his bluff and built a new arena, I doubt David Stern would’ve just let that franchise skip town.

Doughboy on March 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM

There were many villans in that saga.

Schultz could have sold to a group headed by Steve Balmer of Microsoft. Apparently they weren’t moving fast enough for Schultz, mainly because Balmer was in the process of taking over the helm of Microsoft at the time.

Clay Bennett was a lying bastard from day one, and Schultz knew it.

Sterns tried to strong arm the legislature for arena funding and they told him to take a hike.

And the legislature would not lift a finger to debate various funding proposals that would not have burdened the taxpayers.

The City of Seattle was the only one fighting for the fans but they settled their Key Arena lease lawsuit and let the team go.

As usual, the fans got screwed. Fine. The NBA doesn’t need me, I don’t need the NBA. I’ve taken my entertainment dollars elsewhere. And, I’ve taken my coffee dollars to anywhere but Starbucks.

Mallard T. Drake on March 22, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Most of us know how to spell R-E-A-L-I-T-Y.Schultz must have just learned how.

docflash on March 22, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM

You ain’t kidding ….. I went in there once (only cause someone else was buying) and I can’t tell you how many times I repeated the phrase “Large plain coffee, black”.

I thought I was going to be told “No coffee for you”, and to come back in one year.

Jerome Horwitz on March 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Interestingly enough, both the 12oz and 16oz size drinks have the same number of esspreso shots. You are just buying more milk/water whatever your drinking.

Koa on March 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

That’s no excuse for Obamacare, but making $50,000 a year does not necessarily mean one can afford health insurance.

bopbottle on March 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM

I did an estimate online for a family of 4 in California and was finding plans for $400-$800/month depending on the type of insurance and whether or not maternity coverage was included).

Assuming someone that makes 50,000/year ends up with 40,000 after taxes and they choose a mid range plan around 600/month, they’d still have $32,800 left over at the end of the year for their other expenses. It’s not extravagant and you wouldn’t be able to have a great place in expensive areas, but, that leftover is already more than my sister and her husband live off of TOTAL each year.

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:24 PM

But the whole company and their customers do not want plain good coffee. Instead, they (the company, employees, and customers) want to FEEL GOOD.

Just like the health food grocery chain (the name I forgot for the moment), they cater to a special clientele. During good times, they can afford it. A classic example of a company CEO never thought things through, but now wants OTHERS to pay for their feeling good about themselves and the environment and for the children……

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Schultz is for the small business person, as long as they don’t come near the coffee business. Two stories:

There was a monastery in the Puget Sound Area that was roasting coffee beans and selling them at Christmas time. They called it “Christmas Blend” or something like that. Starbucks filed suit against the brothers because Starbucks had a coffee they called christmas blend.

A few years back, a young lady in Astoria, Oregon had a little hole in the wall coffee shop called “Sambucks.” Her name was Samantha Bucks. The only Starbucks in Astoria at the time was in the Fred Meyer located across the bay in the neighboring town of Warrenton. Starbucks sued Sam Bucks to change the name of her shop because it was too close to their name. They didn’t want people thinking that Sambucks was a Starbucks. Beleive me, no one would have made that mistake.

Good ol’ Howard is really a ruthless capitalist trying to protect his turf from interlopers, no matter how small and inconsequential they may be.

Mallard T. Drake on March 22, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Starbucks CEO: On second thought, ObamaCare doesn’t look so good

It didn’t look so good to most everyone on first thought.

Amusing the CEO of Starbucks missed the first round of thought and required a second attempt.

rukiddingme on March 22, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Very true.

If I could do one thing to save this country, it would be to have education dollars follow the student regardless of where they went to school.

But, if I could do two things, it would be to get rid of employer-based healthcare plans. The entire system is fairly messed up now. Last year I tried to find out how much I would be charged if I paid for an office visit in cash. Many of the doctor’s offices I called couldn’t give me a definitive answer. They kept asking what my insurance co-pay was.

I’ve heard other people say that you can negotiate a better rate if you’re paying up-front in cash because they don’t have to deal with filing insurance forms, but, in my experience in Santa Monica, they didn’t seem to know what to do if an insurance company wasn’t involved.

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Starbucks is over rated. I would have to be desperate to stop in and buy a coffee-then it would just be a house blend…..

hawkman on March 22, 2011 at 2:47 PM

If anyone told me that people would actually purchase a $6.00 dollar cup of coffee….

Kini on March 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Or pay 3 bucks for a bottle of water that is no better than what you can get out of the tap for free….

Lily on March 22, 2011 at 2:53 PM

When I can’t get Eight O’Clock Coffee I’ll settle for Chock Full o’ Nuts, believe it or not.

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:26 PM

I’ll second that!….Eight O’Clock Coffee!!! Starbutts? Not so much.

ziggyville on March 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Starbucks sued Sam Bucks to change the name of her shop because it was too close to their name. They didn’t want people thinking that Sambucks was a Starbucks. Mallard T. Drake on March 22, 2011 at 2:40 PM

I’m going to open a coffee shop called Pretentious Over-Priced & Over-Roasted Coffee and see if they sue me.

Prolly will.

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 3:01 PM

There’s no plan that would be a perfect plan, but the intent of the bill and the heartfelt commitment

In other words Shultz is a dumb a$$.

BowHuntingTexas on March 22, 2011 at 3:11 PM

For starters, even Obama knocked the 50-million-uninsured canard down to 31 million. And that’s a bogus number too. About half of that 31 million voluntarily chose NOT to purchase insurance.

But hey, insist on a mandate for insurance with cadillac features and then pass out subsidies. What could go wrong?

BuckeyeSam on March 22, 2011 at 3:21 PM

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

If you take your example of class warfare and REALLY look at it, you’ll find you’re forgetting a few things:
1) State income tax
2) property tax on homes/vehicles/recreational vehicles
3) sales tax
4) homeowners insurance
5) vehicle insurance
6) permit fees (hunting/fishing/drivers etc licenses – vehicle registration fees, any annual licensing fees for professional licensing, etc)
7) water bills
8) electric.bills
9) phone bills
10) heating bills ( and all of these bills require a payment of tax included in then)
And the list just keeps going. And you’ll notice I haven’t included things like clothes, books, co-pays, field trips, musical or sports equipment, home upkeep, dining out/recreation etc etc etc……

KMC1 on March 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM

The agony and the ecstasy of the libtard cult buyer’s remorse. When 50% of any given state’s revenue goes for medifraud, there won’t be enough left over for a $6 venti or grande or whatever the heck these morons tell themselves they’re paying for fairtrade absolution.

Western_Civ on March 22, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Too little, too late Mr. Starbucks boy. I haven’t touched your stuff since you sold out nor will I in the future. I suppose it’s too much to hope for but it would be justice if the tongue bath you gave ObamaCare back when your opinion counted results in the collapse of your company.

Mason on March 22, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Dunkin’ Donuts or Caribou pwns Butt****s (can’t get Sopranos out of my head :-) )

And at half the price. Even if you do pay 4 something for that cup of coffee to get that internet service that’s advertised? Not everywhere, I found out.

MNHawk on March 22, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Hey Chuckles, you aint seen nothin yet.

It’s people of your ilk who should own this in entirety.

nimrod on March 22, 2011 at 4:09 PM

There is no excuse for someone with his business acumen to not know that obamacare was a boondoggle. So, thanks for sticking the rest of us with this crap sandwich so you could sow your lefty oats.

Blake on March 22, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Did documents get filed in answer to Vinson? The administration only had 7 days. It’s been longer than that. I’ve been in and out… what happened?

petunia on March 22, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Akzed on March 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM

I share your pain and have walked out after the barrista sort of refused to serve me a “large” beverage unless I referred to it as a “tall”.
And they do over-roast their beans.

Howard Schultz is an expert in the field of putting great pressure on small businesses – he grew his coffee empire by doing exactly that.
George Howell, world renowned and highly respected former owner of The Coffee Connection (and inventor of the Frappachino), knows a little about that. Many moons ago I worked for him and was heart-broken when learned that Starbucks had forced him out of business.

racecar05 on March 22, 2011 at 4:24 PM

There’s no plan that would be a perfect plan, but the intent of the bill and the heartfelt commitment to insure the uninsured is the right approach.
-Howard Schulz, CEO Starbucks

The road to failure is paved with good intentions.

Democrats are notorious for ill planned good intentions.

scotash on March 22, 2011 at 4:36 PM

This is nothing but racism straight up! How could he care more for his company’s bottom line than his employees health? I mean, geez, how greedy can you get? From this day forward Howard Shultz=CORPORATE GREED!!!

txhsmom on March 22, 2011 at 4:42 PM

“Act first, think later” is not a motto I like for either politicans or CEOs. In addition to getting ride of the democrats, it may be time to sell the Starbucks stock.

Ann on March 22, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Caribou Mahogany whole bean is awesome, particularly if you have one of those grind-and-brew makers where you can’t dial in the fineness of the grind. It’s very forgiving and very tasty.

DrSteve on March 22, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Makes wonder how such a dimwit could ever start and grow a such a successful business.

TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Look at their customer type.

Lesson of the day, there is always somebody else (more) easily duped.

Sir Napsalot on March 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Excuse me-but I’m a regular at Starbucks.
I just love my Caramel with extra coffee Frappucinos.
It’s not just liberals who like the ‘Bucks. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on March 22, 2011 at 5:12 PM

Another one converted.too late for his own good.

clement on March 22, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Starbucks may want to find a CEO whois more like Col Hogan rather than Sargent Schultz. I see nothing, nothing!

chickasaw42 on March 22, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Dunkin’ Donuts or Caribou pwns Butt****s (can’t get Sopranos out of my head :-) )

And at half the price. Even if you do pay 4 something for that cup of coffee to get that internet service that’s advertised? Not everywhere, I found out.

MNHawk on March 22, 2011 at 3:48 PM

The local ‘Bou’s coffee-at least their specialty drinks-are more expensive and not as drinkable as the local ‘Bucks.
If you factor in my ‘Gold-Level’ rewards card-free syrups/refills and a free drink every 15 purchases(It’s not credit it-I have to add money to it)- Starbucks is a MUCH better deal for me.
Dunkin’s is good-especially their iced-mochas.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM

TRANSLATION: Starbucks wants a wavier.

GarandFan on March 22, 2011 at 6:28 PM

I’ve never understood why they didn’t just rename the sizes, but, it’s become such a part of the store that they probably just keep it that way for branding (whether people love it or hate it, it get’s mentioned more than almost anything else about Starbucks).

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM

That is why I don’t go to starbucks, their snobby menu names annoy me.

We have Tim Horton’s finally moving into our area, but this area has a couple of local coffee chains that do a pretty good job. Frankly, I like the cocoa at Mickey D’s better than the expensive coffee shops.

karenhasfreedom on March 22, 2011 at 6:34 PM

A: We have been a leader for almost 20 years now in demonstrating our heartfelt commitment to making sure that we provide health coverage for the majority of our people.

20 years is plenty of time for lifer employers to enter into the cardiovascular and oncology doctor’s offices and start out spending the premiums as they’ll need treatment and surgery. Starbuck’s should terminate all employees over 30.

ericdijon on March 22, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Normally I would say he got hit by a clue stick. But given the fact that Schultz is a Seattle liberal, an entire clue tree must of fell on him. Had he traveled out of state recently.

Slowburn on March 22, 2011 at 7:37 PM

KMC1 on March 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Not exactly sure how what I posted can be mistaken for class warfare.

The original poster mentioned $1500 per month insurance for a family of 4. I found insurance for a family of 4 running between $400-$800 depending on the type of coverage desired.

As for the additional expenses you mentioned, it would indeed be tough to survive on $50,000 per year and pay all of those additional costs. Off the top of my head, I would remove the following:

2) property tax on recreational vehicles
6) permit fees (hunting/fishing)

I would look for ways to reduce these:

1) State income tax (some states don’t have this)
2) property tax on homes/vehicles (move to a smaller home or rent and, if possible reduce the number of vehicles you own)
4) homeowners insurance (there may be available discounts for the home you have. Also, if you scale down to a smaller home, this cost will drop)
5) vehicle insurance (fewer vehicles will drop this cost)
6) permit fees (vehicle registration fees, any annual licensing fees for professional licensing, etc) (again, fewer vehicles will drop this fee. I’m assuming the professional licensing is worth it as you should make more from your profession than the license costs)
7) water bills (make sure there aren’t any leaks, take shorter showers)
8) electric.bills (unplug appliances that aren’t being used)
9) phone bills (no cell phones? Or, if you have cell phones, perhaps no land line? Cheaper plans?)

Are any of the above things sexy and fun? Absolutely not. However, they are all things that a person can do to help make ends meet and still be able to afford insurance.

And, before I get accused of engaging in class warfare against the working poor, it should be known that my husband and I live in a studio apartment, we don’t own a car, we commute everywhere by bike (including the 60 mile round trip 2x per month to visit the in-laws), we have a single cell phone and no land line and my husband does go around the apartment maniacly unplugging appliances that are plugged in but not in use. I’m not preaching anything here that I’m not practicing myself.

JadeNYU on March 22, 2011 at 8:11 PM

Yo, Starbucks. Wake up and smell the schadenfreude.

apostic on March 23, 2011 at 4:37 AM

The coolness of it burns off eventually, eh? That or the Whitehouse party invites never came …

BrideOfRove on March 23, 2011 at 6:09 AM

Hummmm. Any liberal who gets rich off of $6 cups of coffee isn’t going to flip that easy. I bet he thinks there are some things about this Obamacare scheme that can be salvaged.

kens on March 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM

We have been a leader for almost 20 years now in demonstrating our heartfelt commitment to making sure that we provide health coverage for the majority of our people.

Wait….the MAJORITY of your people? You mean you weren’t providing free health insurance to ALL your people???

You heartless bastard!!!

Of course, the vast majority of Americans also already had health insurance before this govt take-over happened, and according to most polls 85% of them liked it as it was. Why didn’t you care about this then, as you now admit you were doing the exact same thing?

runawayyyy on March 23, 2011 at 4:15 PM